MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Biosecurity in dairy calf production: A scoping review

2025· review· en· W4414629721 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Borja Martínez, Andrés Mayorga, Jessica Page, Gregory Habing

Bibliographic record

VenuePreventive Veterinary Medicine · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldVeterinary
TopicAnimal health and immunology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Institute of Food and AgricultureU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsBiosecurityOutbreakAnimal husbandryAgricultureIsolation (microbiology)QuarantineBest practiceInfectious disease (medical specialty)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infectious diseases pose a persistent threat across all stages of the dairy production chain, with calf rearing being particularly vulnerable due to the calves' immature immune systems. Effective biosecurity measures are crucial in mitigating the risk of pathogen introduction and spread among calves. The recent influenza outbreak in U.S. dairy herds underscores the need to evaluate biosecurity practices employed in calf rearing. This scoping review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of reported biosecurity practices and the knowledge and attitudes of calf producers on biosecurity. By identifying existing gaps and areas where further research is essential, the review seeks to enhance biosecurity protocols, ultimately reducing the risk of infectious disease transmission and improving the overall health and productivity of dairy calves. Peer-reviewed studies that reported on biosecurity practices or assessed the knowledge and attitudes of producers in intensive farming systems were included. Out of 983 identified citations, 49 studies were included, mainly from the U.S., Canada, Australia, and Ireland, with a focus on Holstein calves. Internal biosecurity measures, such as calf housing and colostrum management, were widely studied, while external practices, such as isolation and quarantine of new animals, pest control, and sanitization of incoming vehicles and equipment, were underrepresented. To a lesser extent, the attitudes and knowledge of producers regarding biosecurity practices were also explored, highlighting the importance of early care practices. This review emphasizes the significant variability in how biosecurity practices are reported in dairy calf production studies, with only 23 % explicitly identifying practices as biosecurity measures. Prior studies focus predominantly on internal biosecurity measures, particularly during the pre-weaning period, underscores their critical role in calf health. This review supports a need for standardized frameworks for reporting biosecurity practices and more research into producers' attitudes and knowledge to enhance biosecurity implementation and calf health.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.232
GPT teacher head0.515
Teacher spread0.283 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePreventive Veterinary MedicineSame topicAnimal health and immunologyFrench-language works237,207